St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1887-07-21
A BREEZE ON THE AVENUE.
A Stay i'm Proceedings at b. G. Howe'i
New Block.

on the Avenue this week by the fact
that work on the foundations of the
B. G.. Howe block on the corner of
Eastern avenue and Pearl street was
discontinued Monday as a result of no.
tees served on Mr.. Howe Saturday
evening by DR.. Bancroft of Concord,
n. H., and Ex-Gov. Horace Fairbanks
and Col. Franklin Fairbanks of this
place. These notices stated that if the
requirements of the deed by which Mr..
Howe holds the property were not
complied with as regards the location
of the new building legal steps would
be taken to stay further proceedings.
The question of the location of the
block involves some rather interesting
law points. When Andrews and Ban
croft decided this piece of property
years ago it was incorporated in the
deed that if liquor was ever sold on
the premises the property should re-
vert to the grantor if the business
should be persisted in after 80 days
notice had been served. Furthermore,
and following the above condition, the
deed provides that no building shall
be located on the land within 20 feet
of the street line. The west or upper
corner of Mr.. Howe's block as at pres
ent laid out will be about IL feet from
the avenue and the lower front corner
about 20 feet. Among the questions
raised by Mr.. Howe is: Does the rever-
sion of the property to the original
grantOr under the liquor selling pro-
vision of the deed apply as we'll to the
paragraph referring to the location of
buildings?
There is a good deal of feeling over
the matter among those who live and
do business in the vicinity of the pro-
posed block, as it is generally assumed
that the post Office removal question is
at the bottom of the whole thing. But
there are two sides to every question,
and those who are not directly inter-
ested in the affair had best keep cool
while both sides are given hearing.
Mr.. Howe states that he personally
visited DR.. Bancroft at Concord, n. H.,
stated his plans and purposes, and
that the DR.. in the presence of wit
nesses assured him that no objections
would be made to the proposed lOca-
ton, if those owning property in the
vicinity made no sbjeetions- Mr. Howe
easily secured the names of over 100
residents and property holders in that
vicinity to the effect that they would
his foundations, having already ex-
pended number of hundred dollars
in the work. just what interest all
this is to the Fairbanks company,
whose members live on the other side
of the village, and who never owned
any part of this property, is what Mr..
Howe and his friends do not under
stand, particularly as it is claimed that
the building will look better as at
present located than to be built on an
angle. Furthermore, that no objection
|
M. G. A. and other buildings on the
avenue out to the side walk line, and
that it seems to make a good deal oil
difference as to whose OK is gOred.
This, as we understand it is a fair
statement of Mr.. Howe's side of the
case.
Now let us consider the other side OF
the case. Years ago, before the depot
was located, a tract of land to the
north of the avenue and about as far
up as Cherry street was owned by An
drews and Bancroft. The land on the
south of the avenue and the same dis
lance up was owned by Joseph Fair
banks. Later on Messrs. Andrews and
Bancroft and Mr.. Fairbanks entered
into mutual agreement that neither
would sell lot of land from their par
cells without incorporating in the deed
the provision that no liquor should be
sold OH the premises and that no build
ing should be located within 20 feet Of
the street, the property to revert tC
the grantOr in case of violation. The
sales of property by both parties have
always been with this understanding
often obliging the owners to accept
lower prices because of these restric.
, tions. This being so DR.. Bancroft, al
we are informed, has refused to sigr
any withdrawal of the conditions o
| no ho
and E. g. T. Fairbanks & Co., the only
= living representatives of the Origina
owner on the other side of Eastern
3 avenue, have a direct interest in see
3 ing that an agreement entered into b.
them, and one to which they hav'
faithfully adhered, is complied with
Older residents will remember til,
: trouble the company had with Bel
t Hastings on the south side of the ave
] nue. in relation to similar question O
4 location years ago. The fact that TIN
s post office may be removed to TIN
n Howe block is an unfortunate com
o plicatiOn at this time of course, but tn
# Fairbankses are only doing as the
}. have always done in relation to tn
h same question, and they propose to in
a sist upon literal compliance with tin
}. requirements of the deed, in justice t
: themselves and to those to whom the
It have sold property in that vicinit,
e All this being SO they hold that NJ
d Howe cannot build outside the 20 fee